Author Topic: Logan's Profiles - SdKfz 231 Halbkettenfahrzeug  (Read 200738 times)

Offline Weaver

  • Skyhawk stealer and violator of Panthers, with designs on a Cougar and a Tiger too
  • Chaos Engineer & Evangelistic Agnostic
Re: Logan's Profiles - *Spoilers*
« Reply #765 on: November 06, 2015, 10:20:09 AM »
I like the jet He-100. Somewhere in the depths of my to-do list is a Spanish Nationalist one, from a timeline where the Spanish Civil War gets stalemated and the two sides are two de-facto separate countries until the early 1990s. Franco's Fascist Spain isn't getting a whole lot of love post WWII, but it's also providing a haven for German scientists and engineers, some of whom help them jetify the He-100s they bought pre-war and manufactured under licence.
"I have described nothing but what I saw myself, or learned from others" - Thucydides

"I've jazzed mine up a bit" - Spike Milligan

"I'm a general specialist," - Harry Purvis in Tales from the White Hart by Arthur C. Clarke

Twitter: @hws5mp
Minds.com: @HaroldWeaverSmith

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #766 on: March 08, 2016, 03:14:05 PM »
Wow, first new art in my thread in 7 months and first completed profile in 9 months. That is shameful. I don't even have a convenient 9 month excuse like a new tiny human, either. I just lost inspiration during the latter half of the year, then life events ate up a lot of my time, followed by increased work responsibilities. Now, though, things are a little quieter and I had a nice softball of a request from MAD to get me back into the swing of things.

I'll let MAD cover the details of the backstory, but his request was for two AeroTAM L-239 Skorpions: one in ‘RAAF two-tone grey’, and the other in the ‘three-tone camouflage used by the Australian Army on its helicopter fleet (as seen on my Australian Army ‘Mil Mi-24V ‘Hind’ profile). With that as about all the direction I had, I set about trying to meet the request. In this case, the most difficult part of the profiles was picking the right squadrons to operate the units. I won't go into the details of why I felt 12 and 13 Sqns were the most suitable, but there were a lot of factors that went into the decision.



So, with this one, I was fortunate enough to find out that I'd already mounted ASRAAMs on the Indian Navy Skorpion profile that I did years ago. Why did I put ASRAAMs on the Indian Navy L-239 Skorpion? Haven't the foggiest. It was back in 2009, five years before the Indian Air Force signed a deal for them. Weirdly, the layer in that old profile is called "Magic", but the source image I imported it from is clearly called ASRAAM. They don't look anything alike, so I doubt I'd try to pass it off as a Magic. I really don't know. Regardless, I was happy to see that I had the ASRAAM already made up and ready to go. I told MAD that I wasn't going to be adding new ordnance for these profiles (although I did, anyway), so I didn't think he'd be getting the ASRAAMs he wanted. Since it was already done by me 7 years ago, I didn't have to do anything new. Add some drop tanks, HARMs, & JDAMs and call it a day, right? Well, not quite.

Just the gray scheme on the aircraft was boring by itself and the Hawk 127s that inspired this scheme had really pretty full color markings on the tail. But it would be lazy (and wouldn't make sense) to give the Skorpions to one of the Hawk or Hornet units. It's not like the RAAF has a lot of active squadrons to spare, or any combat squadrons that are in dire need of new equipment (that hasn't already been earmarked). That's alright, there's sure to be disbanded squadrons that I could use, or at least active ones that no longer fly aircraft. Once I picked one, I could figure out what markings to put on the tail. Well, I picked 13 Sqn (I had already selected 12 Sqn for the next profile), but there's just one problem: their unit markings are boring.



A compass rose and...horns? What am I even looking at? Should I care? What's their motto? "Resilient and Ready"? Snore. At least it reflects its current boring role of "Base Operations and Training". It's so boring that even the link to the squadron's website is broken. It wasn't always so boring, though. In WWII, they flew Hudsons, Beauforts, and Venturas. They also had this really cool unofficial squadron badge (although it is way too busy and ugly). Their unofficial WWII motto was also great! Yeah, I'm totally nicking that for the re-formed combat unit.



Still, I've found two badges for the squadron, and they're both ugly and terrible. But, there was this...



An unofficial unit patch made up, well...I don't know. In fact, I know basically nothing about it other than it was unofficial and for 13 Sqn RAAF. I have no idea of timeframe (80s, 90s, early 2000s?), origin or use, but at least it looks cool, so I'll nick that, too. Rework it for the tail, come up with a ribbon for it on the tail, redo the font, and call this one done.



Now, on to the next one. This is the camo that I loved from back when I did the Australian Army Mi-24V Hind eight (eight!?!? geez...) years ago. I still think it's one of the world's best looking camo schemes in the world.



I still like the way this one looks, but the details do bug me. The colors are a bit more attractive, but they're not totally correct. I probably just eyeballed them. So, I went looking for a little more accurate, more official values. I found some online with nice FS values. I plugged those in and...didn't much like the results. They looked too dark to me. I thought my old 2008 eyeball ones were a lot pretties and semed to look more like the pictures to me in certain lighting conditions, but were probably too bright. So, I split the difference and was actually pretty happy with the result. That's what I ended up using on the second Australian Frogfoot.



The paint scheme is actually from the old Australian Army GAF Nomad. Well, actually, most Nomads had a completely different, far more complex paint scheme consisting of the same colors, but a lot smaller bands. It's attractive, but "ain't nobody got time for that". I also doubt anyone in the RAAF would go to that sort of trouble painting and doing the upkeep on a fleet of aircraft with that sort of scheme today. It doesn't even fit in with the current Australian Army helicopter's fleet scheme, either, as you can see here:



It's pretty, just really busy, really complicated, and doesn't really match the other aircraft flown by the Australian Army in those colors. One Nomad, though, dared to be different. A18-309 wasn't painted like the rest of the Nomad fleet. Ironically, in being different, it was a lot more similar to the helicopters it operated with. I quite liked it and I adapted that scheme to the Frogfoot, roughly.



In most cases, the underside of the wings and horizontal tail were left in just tan and not camouflaged. I also had a few detail markings that I took from other aircraft, too. I took the style of unit marking on the tail from this old RAAF Caribou...



...but the actual marking itself is the old 12 Sqn marking found on the unit's badge and on the tail of their Chinooks, before the ADF decided it didn't need Chinooks anymore, which was before they decided they needed Chinooks again, which was before the most recent decision to get more Chinooks. In fairness to the ADF, the Canadians had the same "Baby Come Back" moment with the Chinook. "I was wrong, and I just can't live without you." So, I just low-vis'ed the marking and slapped it in the low-vis band from the Caribou. Finally, there's a detail on the nose that you might miss if I don't mention it. That's the name "Dianne". It's subtle, but it's a reference to the old 12 Sqn Vengeances that they flew in WWII.



It's not without precedent, either, as the ADF's Blackhawks carry a name above the cockpit. They look good, too, except that the font looks like Comic Sans. No, not on my profile. We'll use the original, classy script from the Vultee Vengeance A27-209.



That's got to be about it, right? Almost. The drop tank paint scheme also came from the Blackhawk, and I went with more of a CAS loadout here, since it would naturally be supporting ground forces in that paint scheme. Give it LGBs, Mavericks, ASRAAMs, and rocket pods. Normally, I just stick with the B-8M1 rocket pods that I already had for the Su-39 and hand wave it away, but I didn't feel like that would do here. I took a couple of anachronistic 2.75 inch rocket pods (LAU-3, if I recall correctly) and mocked up a crude TER to mount them on. Given how simple rocket pods are and how low of a resolution these eight year old Frogfoot profiles are, I thought it turned out just fine. I sure can't spot the differences between these and newer rocket pods at that size. They look more plausible than the B-8M1s, that's for sure.



Anyway, I hope you all like them. You can see what all goes into just the thought process behind all the details that go into each profile that many people would never even notice at a glance. I agonize way too long over all of these details, so you can see why each profile can take so long. I didn't even go into the hours of research that I put into studying the candidate squadrons for these and why I ruled out all the other potential squadrons for one reason or another.

By the way, I just wanted to give a shout out to the ADF Serials website. What a fanstastic site! I've been using it for years, but I wanted to make sure other people knew about it. It really is fantastic.



Again, though, what is it with the ADF and Comic Sans? I can't seem to get away from it.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Old Wombat

  • "We'll see when I've finished whether I'm showing off or simply embarrassing myself."
  • "Define 'interesting'?"
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #767 on: March 08, 2016, 05:34:19 PM »
'Coz the ADF, despite its many good qualities, knows its miniscule size makes it a bit of a joke in the greater scheme of things? ???
"This is the Captain. We have a little problem with our engine sequence, so we may experience some slight turbulence and, ah, explode."

Offline Tophe

  • He sees things in double...
  • twin-boom & asymmetric fan
    • my models
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #768 on: March 09, 2016, 02:11:50 AM »
Great profiles, as usual...

Offline lauhof52

  • Dutchie
  • The Decimator Guy!
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #769 on: March 10, 2016, 04:08:50 AM »
Nice to have you back on track, Logan. Great profils!

regards
lauhof

Offline Matt Wiser

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #770 on: March 10, 2016, 12:12:21 PM »
Glad to see you back at work, Logan. Nice job!
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect. But always have a plan ready to kill them.

Old USMC Adage.

Offline GTX_Admin

  • Evil Administrator bent on taking over the Universe!
  • Administrator - Yep, I'm the one to blame for this place.
  • Whiffing Demi-God!
    • Beyond the Sprues
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #771 on: March 11, 2016, 02:13:34 AM »
'Coz the ADF, despite its many good qualities, knows its miniscule size makes it a bit of a joke in the greater scheme of things? ???

You might be surprised...
All hail the God of Frustration!!!

Offline apophenia

  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aussie Frog...foots? feet?
« Reply #772 on: March 13, 2016, 04:21:25 AM »
Gorgeous Logan ... and love all the background you've provided  :-*
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new land ...

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #773 on: March 19, 2016, 01:12:30 PM »
Thanks, everyone! It's nice to be back at it! Here's one I've been planning for a while:

As always, click on the image below to see the picture at 100% or view it at my DeviantArt page. I've also submitted this to The Cold War GB over at the What If forum.



A great deal of myth surrounds the Aéronavale use of the Vought V-507 Vagabond, much of it the fault of the French Navy itself. The Aéronavale wasn’t confused about the aircraft's intended role, but they would often give misleading statements about the aircraft's roles and capabilities to press or politicians that may not have understood the need for the aircraft the same way the Marine Nationale did.

Probably the most common myth about the aircraft is that France originally ordered them for use on their aircraft carriers. Often, this is related in a humorous fashion to poke fun at France, suggesting that they ordered the aircraft only to find out after they were too big to fit in the aircraft carriers’ hangars. In fact, there is no evidence that the French Navy ever seriously investigated modifying either ship for their operation, either. The F-14 was always going to be too heavy to be launched or recovered from either the Clemenceau or Foch. The extent of modifications necessary would likely have made them impractical on an aircraft carrier of such a small tonnage. It doesn’t even seem as though much consideration was given to making the replacement aircraft carrier class capable of operating aircraft in the Vagabond’s weight class, either. There was a short time after the end of the Cold War where France briefly considered acquiring a Forrestal-class carrier from the United States, but the costs associated with refitting and operating carriers of that size quickly ruled this out.



Another misconception regarding the Vagabond is the claim that the French Navy intended to exchange their Vagabond squadrons for US Navy Hornet squadrons on its own carriers in the event of war. While the commonality of French and US carrier equipment meant that this was a theoretical possibility, neither country had a formal plan for such an exchange nor was there specific provision made for the operation of Hornets from the French carriers. In fact, the French Navy began evaluating the F-18 as early as 1976, before purchasing LTV’s V-507. Had the French Navy intended to swap aircraft with the United States, then it would seem logical to have merely purchased the Hornet at the outset instead of the Vagabond.



Other myths about the Aéronavale’s Vagabonds include those that fall into the category of the purchase being primarily motivated by some rivalry with the Armée de l'Air, the Royal Navy, or some other service. While politics always plays a factor in any large defense contract, the acquisition of the Vagabond was largely driven by external threats. A variation on this theme is that the V-507 was either a response to a failed attempt by Dassault to make a carrier fighter out of the Mirage G, or even that it was a stop gap for some projected Mirage G carrier fighter that never materialized. Neither of these seems to be the case, at least not as a direct influence. The kernel of truth to this myth is found in Dassault’s partnership with Ling-Temco-Vought during the early part of the V-507’s development. While this had a direct influence on major elements of the V-507 design, the technology exchange between Dassault and LTV was largely one directional. Dassault was not provided with any significant technical information by Vought on the V-507 until the aircraft had been ordered and Dassault partnered with Vought to be able to perform major overhauls and depot level maintenance on the Aéronavale’s Vagabonds.



Despite the misinformation surrounding it, the operational needs that drove the French Navy’s acquisition of the Vagabond are actually pretty clear and very similar to the US Navy’s original Fleet Air Defense (FAD) and later VFX programs. The threat the French carriers posed by Soviet Naval Aviation bombers armed with large anti-ship missiles had only been growing since the Clemenceau and Foch were launched, but it was the appearance of the Tu-22M ‘Backfire’ that truly rendered the F-8 Crusader completely incapable of defending their charges. An aircraft with a higher top speed, far longer range, better radar, and much more capable beyond visual range (BVR) missiles was needed as soon as possible. Unfortunately, the small size of French carriers also meant that there was no way that an aircraft with the necessary performance would ever be able to operate from the decks of the Clemenceau-class ships. The French Navy benefitted from operational factors that the US Navy did not, however.



US supercarriers had to be able to operate completely independently in the North Atlantic or Pacific in environments where the only land for hundreds of miles was likely to be hostile territory defended by enemy air cover. French carriers would typically be operating in the Mediterranean, a comparatively small body of water ringed by friendly air bases. The main aerial threat to the French Navy in the Mediterranean came from Soviet Naval Aviation (AVMF) long range bombers armed with anti-ship missiles. The over 500 nm combat radius of the F-14 would allow it to cover most of the Mediterranean from only a couple of NATO bases. This could also be extended through the use of Etendard buddy tankers once the F-14s rendezvoused with the carrier air group.



So, if the Aéronavale never intended to fly their new fighters from carriers, why was it even a requirement for the F-8 Crusader’s replacement to be carrier capable? Well, the answer to that question starts to get into the political considerations that led to all the confusion about the Vagabond’s role. The Marine Nationale was afraid that any attempt to acquire a purely land-based fighter like the F-15 Eagle would face considerable resistance from the Armée de l'Air, who would maintain that land-based air defense was their responsibility. Even if the Aéronavale could overcome that opposition, they would then have to respond to protests from Dassault. As France’s only manufacturer of modern fighter aircraft, they would insist the French Navy select a domestic aircraft design for the role, such as the Mirage F1, the new Mirage 2000, or even the Mirage 4000 then in development. By requiring the fighter to have performance superior to the F-8 Crusader and be carrier-capable, they could side-step both of these objections—even if they had no intention of ever actually taking advantage of that capability.



The Marine Nationale was savvy enough to realize that purchasing the aircraft was only half the battle, politically-speaking. Once they had them, they had to make sure nobody tried to come in and take them away again, especially when the aircraft entered service and did not start appearing on the decks of France’s carriers. The Aéronavale had a few strategies to deflect such criticism. The first was to emphasize the aircraft’s naval pedigree at every opportunity. The Aéronavale’s policy was to refer to the Vagabond as a “carrier fighter” in all documentation, interviews, and press releases. Similarly, Flottille 12F and 14F were maintained as carrier squadrons based at BAN Landivisiau after transitioning from the F-8 Crusader to the F-14 Vagabond. Vagabond pilots had to remain carrier-qualified while they were active. Typically, this was done using the Fouga CM-175 Zéphyr carrier-capable variant of the Magister jet trainer, but this was supplemented by temporary postings to Etendard squadrons and as exchange officers flying with the US Navy.



The French Navy also took advantage of opportunities to cross-deck on US carriers with the Vagabond, making sure to take plenty of photographs and film footage whenever they did so. Much of this was used in recruitment material that further reinforced the impression of the F-14 as a carrier fighter in the general public. Finally, the Marine Nationale maintained that the Vagabond could land on the Clemenceau or Foch in an emergency. This theoretical possibility was never trialed by the French Navy for fear that attempts to prove the capability had just as much of a chance of disproving it through a crash. Because of the risk that such a large, heavy aircraft attempting an emergency landing posed to the precious French carriers, Aéronavale F-14 pilots were actually trained to eject alongside the carrier or “plane guard” escort in the event they couldn’t safely reach a land base due to damage, technical malfunction, or lack of fuel.



Regardless of Aéronavale rhetoric, though, the Vought V-507 was almost exclusively operated from land bases, where it would fly far out over the sea to guard French ships from aerial threats. It was most certainly not an attempt by the French Navy to compete with the Armée de l'Air with its own naval “air force”. Rather, it was the result of a practical assessment of the operating environment and realistic capabilities of France's carrier air groups pitted against the threat of Soviet Naval Aviation. In that role, Aéronavale F-14 units would often migrate from NATO base to NATO base during a carrier’s Mediterranean cruise, truly living up to its name of “Vagabond”.

Cheers,

Logan

Offline Matt Wiser

  • Newly Joined - Welcome me!
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #774 on: March 19, 2016, 03:36:54 PM »
Nice job, and no doubt LTV would've been very happy to have another export customer besides Imperial Iran.
Treat everyone you meet with kindness and respect. But always have a plan ready to kill them.

Old USMC Adage.

Offline lauhof52

  • Dutchie
  • The Decimator Guy!
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #775 on: March 19, 2016, 04:42:14 PM »
Excellent job, Logan!

Offline Tophe

  • He sees things in double...
  • twin-boom & asymmetric fan
    • my models
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #776 on: March 19, 2016, 06:10:47 PM »
Almost the same profile (with a few pixel difference after the jet exhaust) could be a rather-light single-engine fighter, good for the Clémenceau... Will you try ou should I do it?

Offline elmayerle

  • Its about time there was an Avatar shown here...
  • Über Engineer...at least that is what he tells us.
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #777 on: March 19, 2016, 10:40:52 PM »
Almost the same profile (with a few pixel difference after the jet exhaust) could be a rather-light single-engine fighter, good for the Clémenceau... Will you try ou should I do it?
Something like a navalized single-, or twin-, seat Mirage G with a M-53?

Offline apophenia

  • Patterns? What patterns?
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #778 on: March 20, 2016, 11:54:03 AM »
Very nice ... and great backstory  :)
The hammer of the gods will drive our ships to new land ...

Offline Logan Hartke

  • High priest in the black arts of profiling...
  • Rivet-counting whiffer
Re: Logan's Profiles - Aéronavale Vought F-14A Vagabond
« Reply #779 on: March 23, 2016, 11:45:38 PM »
Thanks, everyone! This was a lot of fun to do, even though I spent way too long writing the backstory for this one.

Nice job, and no doubt LTV would've been very happy to have another export customer besides Imperial Iran.

Yep! And France won't be the last, either...

Almost the same profile (with a few pixel difference after the jet exhaust) could be a rather-light single-engine fighter, good for the Clémenceau... Will you try ou should I do it?

Go for it, Tophe! I have enough on my play to go modifying the V-507 in that way!

Cheers,

Logan